Mid-term results of aortic valve preservation:: Remodelling vs. reimplantation

Objective: Valve-preserving root replacement has become an accepted alternative to composite replacement both in dissection and in aneurysmal disease. We retrospectively analysed 5-year results comparing root remodelling and reimplantation procedures, Methods: From October 1995 to January 2001, 119 patients underwent either root remodelling (groupA; n=98; age: 61+/-14 years) or valve reimplantation within a vascular graft (group B; n = 21; age: 47+/-17 years). In group A, 26 patients were operated for aortic dissection type A and 72 for aortic valve regurgitation and aneurysmal disease. In group B, 8 patients were operated for aortic dissection type A, 13 for aortic valve regurgitation and aneurysm. Concomitant arch surgery was performed in 65 patients (group A: 57; group B: 8). Results: Time on cardiopulmonary bypass was 121+/-30 min in group A, 143+/-24min in group B, and aortic cross-clamp time was 87+/-19 min in group A and 113+/-24 minin group B. Average duration was therefore longer in group B (p = n.s.) Hospital mortality was 3.1 % in group A and 0% in group B. Following elective procedures, hospital mortality was 1.1 % in group A. Freedom from aortic regurgitation over grade 2 at 4 years was 86 % in group A and 94.7 % in group B. At 4 years, freedom from proximal reoperation was 97.8 % in group A and 100 % in group B. There was no deterioration of valve function or need for reoperation observed after 1 year in either group. Conclusion: Five-year results are comparable and encouraging for remodelling and reimplantation procedures. If the initial valve function and geometry is adequate, the chance of secondary failure beyond the first year is minimal.